SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Guj) 761

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI, J.
ARVINDKUMAR NARSINHBHAI PATEL - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6053 of 2021
Decided On : 31-08-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For The Appellant :MR. I.H.SYED, SR. ADVOCATE WITH PRITHU PARIMAL
For The Respondent: MR. MITESH AMIN, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Point of law: Under Section 41A to Section 41B is a sufficient guard to secure the attendance of an accused person to aid investigation in cases, where the punishability of the alleged offences does not exceed 7 years.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 438 - Facts of case suggest that CIMS Hospital by way of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) had entered into list of hospitals for treatment of COVID-19 patients under reference by Government - For sanction of bills of COVID-19 patients they were to be produced before Deputy Municipal Health Officer of Municipal Corporation Health Department - Allegations are that for sanction of bills approximately bill was demanded by Hospital on behalf of present petitioner - As complainant was not ready to pay bribe money they filed complaint - Whether a court can issue a warrant to apprehend a person during investigation for his production before police in aid of investigation.

Finding of the Court:

In absence of any specific provision in Section 41A of Cr.P.C. for an order from the Court for issuance of warrant, and when Section 41A itself permits the Police Officer to make an arrest, no order under Section 73 of Cr.P.C. would be warranted and no order under Section 73 be made to aid the investigation, when there is no specific inbuilt safeguards, laying protection against self-incrimination - Sub-section (3) of Section 41A permits the Police Officer to make an arrest where the accused person attends before the investigating officer in response to a notice of appearance under Section 41A(1). This power is not subject to any statutory control, and thus in absence of any procedural control, every case of a notice of appearance invariably goes to the District Court or to the High Court for granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., which in the present case as submitted before the Court, the petitioner is pursuing his remedies for anticipatory bail.

Result: Ordered accordingly

JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Learned Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. On 25.3.2021, an application was moved for issuance of warrant under Section 70 of Cr.P.C. against Dr. Arvindbhai Narsinhbhai Patel, Deputy Health Officer, Bodakdev Zone, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation towards the offence registered under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered at Ahmedabad City (A.C.B.) Police Station as C.R. No. 9/2020.

3. The complaint dated 3.12.2020 is filed by Dr. Dhawalkumar Narendrabhai Patel- Deputy medical administrator, CIMS Hospital, Sola Ahmedabad. The FIR is registered on 4.12.2020 against (i) Dr. Naresh Malhotra of Aditya Hospital and (ii) Dr. Arvindbhai Narsinhbhai Patel, Deputy Health Officer- North-East Zone, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, the present petitioner. The offence is stated to have been committed on 31.7.2020, whereby accused No.1 was arrested on 16.2.2021.

4. The facts of the case suggest that CIMS Hospital by way of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) had entered into list of hospitals for the treatment of COVID-19 patients under reference by Government. For sanction of bills of the COVID-19 patients, they were to be produced before the Deputy Municipal Health Officer of the Municipal Corporation Health Department. Allegations are that for the sanction of the bills, approximately amounting to Rs.1,50,00,000/-, 10% of the bill amount was demanded by Dr. Naresh Malhotra of Aditya Hospital, Sola, Ahmedabad on behalf of the present petitioner. As complainant was not ready to pay the bribe money, they filed the complaint.

4.1 The A.C.B Police States that the conversation between witness Ketan Acharya and accused No.1 Dr. Naresh Malhotra is noted, which prima-facie shows that present petitioner accused No.2 Dr. Arvind Narsinhbhai Patel has demanded 10% money of the total bill, as bribe. It is alleged that the petitioner, inspite being a government employee, to take illegal monetary benefit, has made his age-old friend and batch-mate Dr. Naresh Malhotra his middle-man, and both conspired to take huge sum of money as bribe towards the payment of government money.

4.2 In the conversation between accused No.1 and Ketan Acharya, Ketanbhai says to meet the present petitioner in person, for that accused No.1 refuses to do so, saying that Dr. Arvind Patel won’t talk with him. According to Police, Accused No.1 being a private practitioner shall not call any witness and demand 10% for passing the bill.

4.3 ACB Police contended before the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) that in accordance to Section 41A of Cr.P.C., on 20.2.2021, notice was sent to the petitioner, but has failed to appear and thus has not cooperated the investigation.

4.4 On 21.2.2021, they enquired at his house, the Petitioner was not found there. His wife informed them that the petitioner had come at 10.45 p.m., by keeping the mobile phone at home, left the house informing her that he is away from house for ten days.

4.5 ACB police states that as petitioner did not remain present on 23.2.2021, they searched the house of his relatives, at Dariyapur Police Station, Kishanwadi Police Station and Vadodara City etc., requisition were given to send the accused-petitioner for investigation.

4.6 On 1.3.2021 and 2.3.2021, they found petitioner’s house lock. On 2.3.2021, again they searched him at his relatives place. On 7.3.2021, as the petitioner’s house was locked, they called his wife who asked them to see her at the office of one acquaintant, where the Police recorded the statement of petitioner’s wife and the said person.

4.7 Under these circumstances, the Police prayed for warrant under Section 70 of Cr.P.C.

5. The Petition has been filed with a prayer to issue appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 2.4.2021 passed by the learned 5th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural).

6. Mr. I.H.Syed, learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Prithu Parimal,

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top